Allowed

Max Hypermarket (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Mrs. Renu Kumari Agarwal

Telangana HC4 Apr 2023TRCMP/112/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana allowed a transfer petition under Section 24 CPC to move an arbitration objection petition from the Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, to the Principal Special Court, Hyderabad, to ensure consolidated hearing with a counter claim petition due to legal interlinkage.

What did the court decide?

Arbitration O.P. No. 171 of 2022 transferred to Principal Special Court, Hyderabad, to try along with C.O.P. No. 16 of 2022. File transmission directed within four weeks.

Max Hypermarket (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mrs. Renu Kumari Agarwal — Arbitration | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

IJICH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA A1 I-IYDERN BAD

¶2

TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL . TWOTHOUSANDANDTWENTYTHREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRIIUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU

¶5

Transfer Ci v1I Miscellaneous Petition No.1 72of2023

¶6

Between:

¶7

Max Hyperrnarket ,ndia) ?vt..Ltd., 2nd Floor, Above Spar Hyper Market, 39/3 and 44, Bannershatr, n*a, A;grl"i"":SioO'Oii, Karnataka. Rep. by its Authorized Signator/, Mr. Sunny Abraiam.

¶8

Petitioner.

¶9

AND

¶10

, Y..r:^O:, fymarj A.garwal,W/o.Mr. Ajay Kishore fayat, aged abour 58 yea rs, oct.. Househotd. R / o.6;l_1.1 Bs / t$7i, r;J ;;; 4r, Floor, Btrora

¶11

^^{?l "llu. Maktha, Begumpet, HyderaLallsiio ori.'"} z. rvrr. vrney 5rngh, Ex_Managing Director, M/s. Max Hypermarket (lndia) Pvr. Ltd.. rrro. 2or, WoodvaL Xpril;;ir; il"rir,", ril*r, Nanclidurs

¶12

^^{!?_oad,BensonTown, nangalorels6d-il;;"(;;;ilil} i,","

¶13

Honbte K. Sanga Reddy,i"ri."dD;;"tl;;"'il",-N" 108, Babukhaans Aneesh Towers, Walker Town, n a_urrJn-uf*, ilunaerabad.

¶14

...Respondents.

¶15

Petition Under Section 24 of the C.P.C. Praying that in the

¶16

crrcums;tances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to a) Transfer the Arb. O.p. No. 771 of 2022now pending on the file of the Hpnble X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court ar Hyderabad to the Honble^principal Special Court in the Cadre of District Judge for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes at Hyderabad along with COP No. 1,6 of 2022,

¶17

b) Consequently, direct that a consolidated hearing be conducted for the petitions bearing Arb. O.p. No. 171 of 2022 and COp No. 16 of 2022 for proper and fair adjudication of the said petitions.

¶18

c) To pass any such othcr ortler(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and prope.r in the circumsl.rlccs oI the case.

¶19

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶20

Petition under Sectiorr 151^(lPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filecl in support of the petition, the^{HighCourt may} be pleased to stay all furthcr proceedings in^{Arb.O.P.No.l77of 2022} pending on the file of the X Arlclitional^Chief Judge,^{City CivilCourtat} Hyderabad till the disposal oI^{the present TransferCivilMiscellaneous} Petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri^{Rtrsllet'k Rcdciy.K.V}

¶22

Counsel for tl-re Respondent^{No.1: Snrt. Maniari S Canu} Counsel for the Respondcnt Nos.2^{& 3: NoneaPpears.}

¶23

The Court made the following:^ORDIIR

¶24

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVA RAO NAIDU TRANSFER CML MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.l12 oF 2023

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

This petition has been filed by the petitioner who is 1", respondent in Arbitration O.P.No. 17 I of 2022 on the file of X Additionai Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. '1-hc petitioner h;rs liled the present petition under Section 24 of C.l,.C rr ith a pravcr to rralsfer Arbitration O.P.No.171 of 2022 from X Addirional Chief Jr-rdge, Cit1, Civil Court. H,yclerabad and to transfer the same to the Principal Special Court under the cadre of District Judge for Trial ancl Disposal of Commercial Disputes at Hyderabad to try along with C.O.p.No.l6 of 2022.

¶27

In support of the petition, one Sunny Abraham who is '*,orking as Zonal Business Head and Authorized Representative of petitioner/ lst respondent filed his a{lidavit ald subrnitted that he is authorized to represent the petitioner herein by virtue of board resolution dated 16.08.2022 and that he has got acquaintance with the {acts of thr: case. Accorciing to the furth.er avernrerrts of the

¶28

Tr.cMP No.112^{of 2023}

¶29

affidavit^{filed bv the sai(l .\lrraham'it s'as the case ol thc} petitioner^{hereinthatth( ' iiled Arbitration () P No 171 of} 2022 under^{Section34 of Arbitrationand ConciliationAct'} 1996 with^{a prayer to set aside the arbitrationawarddated} 04.12.2021,^{interim au'arc1clated27 'O3'2021' for dismissal} oftheclaimsofresponclcntandforallowingtheircounter claim. In^{lact, the petitlorl u'as initiallv filed before the} Principal^{Special Court tturler the cadrc of DistrictJudge} for Trial^{andDrsposarl ofCommercial Disputes at} Hyderabad.^{However' thc said petition was returnedby the} ofhce^{on the ground that counter claim of the petitioner did} not fall^{within its peculiar jurisdiction'The said petition} was filed^{before the X Additional Chief Judge' City Civil} Court,^HYderabad'

¶30

The 1't^{respondentalso challengedthe arbitral award} dated 04'^{L2'2o21bywalr of filing C'o'P'No'16of 2022'The} 1"t resPondent^ln petitioner^{herein 'tr!'as shownas} has claimed^{that the} C.O.P.No.^{16 of 2022 The petitioner} relief sought^{and pleadingsmad'eby the pa-rtiesto the} above referred^{ArbitrationO P', and C'O'P',are one and} the same. Both the above^{petitionsare also filed under the}

¶31

¶32

TT.CMP No.1 12 of 2O23

¶33

¶34

same provision i. e. , under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, i 996. Since the above referred petitions are connected and interlinked, they need to be dealt with concurrently for precise understanding of the reliefs sought by both the parties. Thereby, the petitioner sought for transfer of Arbitration O.P.No. 171 of 2022 from X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad to Principal Special Court under rhe cadre of District Judge for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes at Hyderabad to try along with C.O.p.No.l6 of 2022.

¶35

The respondent appeared before the Court through his counsel and reported no objection for transfer of the above said Arbitration O.P. In view of the averments made in the aff,rdavit filed in support of the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition, it is very clear that the issue in the above referred Arbitration O.P. and C.O.p. pending on the file of X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and Commercial Court at Hyderabad are interlinked, thereby to avoid conflicting orders and for better understanding, it is just and necessar5,, to consider

¶36

¶37

¶38

'rr.CMP No.112 oJ 2023

¶39

the request of the petitioner herein. Thcrcfore, the petition

¶40

can be allowed

¶41

In the result, rhe pet,ition is :rllou,ed. As a consequence, thereof, Arbitration O.P.No. 17 | of 2022 on the frle of X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad is withdras'n ar-r d transferred to the file of Principal Special Court nnder the cadre ol District Judge lor Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes at Hyderabad to try along srth C.O.P.No.16 ot 2022

¶42

The concerned Court is hereby directed to transmit the entire case file, after duly indexed, rn ithin (4) four weeks from the date of receipt of this Order, under the intimation to the other side

¶43

As a sequel, pending Miscellaneous Applications, if

¶44

any, shall stand closed

¶45

Sdl- N. CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTANT REGIflIRAR / /'IRUECoPY/ / ul SECTION &TTICTN

¶46

To,

¶47

¶48

The X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad.

¶49

2 The Principal Speciai Coult in the Cadre of District Judge for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes at Hvderabad.

¶50

J. One CC to Sri Rusheek Retldy.K.V. Advocate IOPUCI 4. 9". 99^{to Smr. Manjari S (,anu, aaro.rt"lOdUCl -'}

¶51

Two CD Copir's

lCK NJB

I.IICH COURT

SSRN,J

DATED.} /0412023

ORDER

TRCMP.No.112^{of 2023}

¶60

Allowing^{the Tr.C.M'P' withoutcosts} 4 ffit

Max Hypermarket (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Mrs. Renu Kumari Agarwal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Max Hypermarket (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Mrs. Renu Kumari Agarwal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bandari Tulja Bai, (Died) and 5 others Vs Shree Ballabh Vyas and another

Smt. Gannamaneni Chandrika Vs Sagar Rao Gannamanneni

Smt.Kamsani , Morsu Santhosh Kumari Vs Kamsani Prashanth Reddy

Ramesh Chandra Soni Vs Late Shri Satyanarayan Soni

Rapelli Satyanarayana Vs Dontha Devadas

D. Shravani Vs D. Praveen Kumar